"feminist get tough maleness"? (r)

Nick:
well put.
-- bruce
--------
"attention creates value"
>From: statusquo@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Nick Jehlen)
>
>Well - my sincerest appologies - for some reason I got the impression after
>reading some of the posts on this list serve that people might be
>interested in subjects a little deeper than "SLORC / Anti-SLORC" - such as
>how do we build societies, governments, and movements that reflect true
>social-justice. Looking at the mail I recieved for pointing out that our
>private communications are an important factor and reflect how we deal with
>and respect different members of the movement and people outside the
>movement, I guess that's not the case.
>
>I should point out that I did not wish for this to be a long drawn out
>discussion of Dawn Star's letter (mistakenly posted to this list). I'd
>rather we started dealing with sexism (among other things) within the
>movement so that when the people of Burma defeat SLORC (and other peoples
>around the world do the same with their oppressors [and we will]) we can be
>moving toward true freedom, instead of just "defeating the SLORC". In my
>opinion, that means working towards justice in terms of gender, race etc.
>now, not waiting for an "appropriate" time.
>
>Of course, I've tried this before, with other groups, trying to bring up
>internal problems instead of just the simpler external goals, and I've been
>shouted down before as well. But from my experience, if issues such as
>racism and sexism are not dealt with up-front, people who would otherwise
>be excellent organizers often decide it is not worth it if they are going
>to have to put up with people who fail to treat them with respect. Sorry to
>use you're letter as an example dawn star, but I've seen to many people
>just brush off sexist attitudes and complaints about them because they
>"distact from the movement's real goals". As I pointed out in my post, dawn
>star is no more guilty of sexism than I am - but I hope that by the time
>SLORC is no more
>
>This is not a private post, because this is not a private issue. I really
>would rather this did not turn into a yelling-fest about private vs. public
>posts (or really about Dawn Star's letter - I'm not trying to point out
>that Dawn Star is the problem,far from it)
> - I would hope that we could discuss sexism as a part of the movement. I
>also hope I'm not the only one who's worried about sexism and how it
>affects us - if I am tho, I'm happy to be the only one saying anything.
>
>Nick Jehlen
>
>
>
>>From: "dawn star (Euro-Burmanet)" <cd@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>>statusquo@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote so dawn star replies
>>listen statusquo, i apologised and thats it for me, i said i was sorry
>>i used the public transport system,by error of key tap, and i am not
>>going on with this, because its private, but i will say, if you think
>>thats offensive, learn whats really offensive, come to paris, or go
>>to burma, and learn for yourself, or maybe you already have, and in that
>>case, have a nice day,no more comment here, now get to work or have a
>>nice day, and stay off the public system if its private what you have
>>to say, dawn star out
>>>
>>> From: statusquo@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Nick Jehlen)
>>>
>>> >From: "dawn star (Euro-Burmanet)" <cd@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >
>>> >dear john and conference burmanet people,
>>> >
>>> >about a rather flippant query about the french female sex,
>>> >sorry for the remark on the main net line, thought it was personal,
>>> >please excuse the chatter
>>> >out, and back to work
>>> > dawn star
>>>
>>> Dear John, dawn star, and everyone else,
>>>
>>> Well, that's the most offensive thing I've seen in email in a long while -
>>> and that's saying something! I suppose it should serve as a reminder tho -
>>> not that we need to be careful about what we post to the listserve, but
>>> that attitudes like that ("preferably very young, and charming and sexy and
>>> they do not go in for all that feminist get tough maleness, they can exceed
>>> without it, with their own intelligent feminism") abound in all movements.
>>>
>>> I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but I still am. "feminist get tough
>>> maleness"? Did you mean to say "self-confident, willing to make up their
>>> own minds"? I guess I should be glad that this got posted on the list-serve
>>> - at least we'll all remember what pigs we can be when we think no one else
>>> is listening. Instead of appologizing for posting this on the serve, try
>>> not talking about women in demeaning and objectifying ways - even in
>>> private.
>>>
>>> Nick Jehlen
>>>
>>> P.S. Please don't take this as a self-righteous letter - I've said some
>>> pretty offensive and stupid things in my time - but I'm working on changing
>>> my own sexist ideas - I hope we call can.